Vulnerability Database

373,546

Total vulnerabilities in the database

CVE-2025-37957 — linux / linux_kernel

Use After Free

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

KVM: SVM: Forcibly leave SMM mode on SHUTDOWN interception

Previously, commit ed129ec9057f ("KVM: x86: forcibly leave nested mode on vCPU reset") addressed an issue where a triple fault occurring in nested mode could lead to use-after-free scenarios. However, the commit did not handle the analogous situation for System Management Mode (SMM).

This omission results in triggering a WARN when KVM forces a vCPU INIT after SHUTDOWN interception while the vCPU is in SMM. This situation was reprodused using Syzkaller by:

  1. Creating a KVM VM and vCPU
  2. Sending a KVM_SMI ioctl to explicitly enter SMM
  3. Executing invalid instructions causing consecutive exceptions and eventually a triple fault

The issue manifests as follows:

WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 25506 at arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:12112 kvm_vcpu_reset+0x1d2/0x1530 arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:12112 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 PID: 25506 Comm: syz-executor.0 Not tainted 6.1.130-syzkaller-00157-g164fe5dde9b6 #0 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.12.0-1 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:kvm_vcpu_reset+0x1d2/0x1530 arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:12112 Call Trace: <TASK> shutdown_interception+0x66/0xb0 arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c:2136 svm_invoke_exit_handler+0x110/0x530 arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c:3395 svm_handle_exit+0x424/0x920 arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c:3457 vcpu_enter_guest arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:10959 [inline] vcpu_run+0x2c43/0x5a90 arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:11062 kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0x50f/0x1cf0 arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:11283 kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x570/0xf00 arch/x86/kvm/../../../virt/kvm/kvm_main.c:4122 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:870 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:856 [inline] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x19a/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:856 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:51 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80 arch/x86/entry/common.c:81 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6e/0xd8

Architecturally, INIT is blocked when the CPU is in SMM, hence KVM's WARN() in kvm_vcpu_reset() to guard against KVM bugs, e.g. to detect improper emulation of INIT. SHUTDOWN on SVM is a weird edge case where KVM needs to do something sane with the VMCB, since it's technically undefined, and INIT is the least awful choice given KVM's ABI.

So, double down on stuffing INIT on SHUTDOWN, and force the vCPU out of SMM to avoid any weirdness (and the WARN).

Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with Syzkaller.

[sean: massage changelog, make it clear this isn't architectural behavior]

  • Published: May 20, 2025
  • Updated: Nov 15, 2025
  • CVE: CVE-2025-37957
  • Severity: High
  • Exploit:
  • CISA KEV:

CVSS v3:

  • Severity: High
  • Score: 8.8
  • AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H

CWEs:

Frequently Asked Questions

A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.

CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.

A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.

Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.

Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.

SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.